Titans are in Town

by Tomislav Sunic

  The first step for a White student or an activist is to get acquainted with at least a few classics and choose a good roadmap when reading them. Only later on, when their message begins to sink in, will he be able to grasp the criminal motives of the main movers and shakers in the study of humanities in the university. For instance, in order to understand his instructor’s palaver about Karl Marx and his epoch, a student might be well advised to combine the instructor’s mandatory reading list with his own list of authors, such as novelists Charles Dickens or Honoré de Balzac. Both novelists lived during the same epoch as the sociologist Marx, yet both were far better in graphically describing the wretched conditions of workers in early capitalist France and England.

  Naturally, Shakespeare always comes in handy, not just for those wishing to understand the timeless issue of human fickleness, treachery and vanity, but also for those wishing to get a first whiff of the world of Shylock and what Shylock thinks of himself and his chosen tribe:

  Shylock: I will buy with you, sell with you, talk with you, walk with you, and so following; but I will not eat with you, drink with you, nor pray with you. (I, iii.)

  Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice is an important work of literature today for students wishing to grasp the language of modern banksters and the meanings of new financial fraud originating at Goldman Sachs, or when the Fed’s “Helicopter Ben” Bernanke preaches “quantitative easing” in order to con the masses into illusions about new job openings. Endless promissory notes about monetary bonds between Antonio and Shylock did not work out, so Shylock demands from Antonio a pound of flesh cut out from his body. This must have been a Shakespearian form of “prime collateral.” The same procedure is finding its mirror image today in “subprime collateral,” or in the grand total of student loan debt which has reached $1 trillion in the USA today.

  Shylock: You’ll ask me, why I rather choose to have

  A weight of carrion flesh, than to receive

  Three thousand ducats. I’ll not answer that. But say it is my humour. (IV, i.)

  And the list goes on. Reading the 18th-century French Enlightenment writer Voltaire and his passages on the religious intolerance of Jews and Christians is a much safer literature for starters than passing out Jew-baiting pamphlets, or yelling silly slogans “Sieg Heil!” or “White Power!” In any case, these infantile exclamations are precisely what the enemy’s big ears want to hear. Students must be also careful with Cliffs Notes, as they often hide an oblique meta-message by a stray leftist or pederast interpreter who is smart enough to tamper, or worse, reinterpret the text in accordance with his/her sick hormones. A case in point is Friedrich Nietzsche, the great anti-egalitarian Western thinker whose texts were successfully hijacked by leftist scholars after WWII. A word of advice: always look at the name of the publisher and the pedigree of the commentator, or the name of the preface writer before starting to read the text of a classic.

  Plain old novels, dramas and poetry by classic Western writers often reflect better the climate of the socioeconomic and racial environment of a given epoch than heavy handed texts in sociology or ravings by a political science teacher. Only later on can the reading of novels be supplanted by the reading of scholarly works on the subjects of liberalism, race and multiculturalism. By then, a student will be already all pruned up and equipped with the necessary conceptual weaponry for the better comprehension of the horrible world he lives in. My suggestion: The course “Literature and Politics” — of course, in an ideal college environment — should be a standard undergrad 101 course in the study of humanities. The beauty of reading novels is that they provide good conceptual tools for a better understanding not just of the world as it once was, but also as it now is.

  Today’s courses in humanities all over the Western academia are mega-sessions in educational travesty and a waste of students’ time and money. Most college courses in the humanities are in criminal violation of the right of White students to critical thinking and free inquiry. Not that all contemporary professors in the humanities are bad. In fact most of them are just simple turncoats who toe the line of the dominant political myths and who will dump them once new political myths become trendy. More obsessed with their own egos than with quality teaching, their classes must be structured along the mimicked verbiage on “the power of diversity.” There is no attempt to guide students through the rudimentary lessons of critical thinking; intellectual curiosity is completely left aside. The entire academic fauna — both in Europe and the USA — is made up of pathetic characters sporting fake smiles and indulging in promiscuous brownnosing of their superiors, with all of them being pathologically jealous of each other. Long ago, the so-called multiracial sensitivity training program turned Western higher education into a grotesque entertainment industry, barring intelligent White students from any critical inquiry into the nature of the beliefs being foisted on them.

  A half-decent White professor with a conservative background who wishes to bypass his compulsive neurosis of self-censorship must engage in the ritual of fawning upon the Jews. Or he must deliver occasional laudatory pep talks about the state of Israel. This is just about the only safe strategy to secure himself the miniscule perks available to “conservatives.”

  On the opposite side of the teaching spectrum, for a high IQ White student, who possesses some vestiges of introspection, college courses represent emotional abuse — for which neither his teacher, nor the dean’s office, nor the upper government echelons are ever called to account. Such a situation cannot last forever.

  In both Europe and the USA, the only way for a White student to survive the well-planned process of educational dumbing down and brainwashing is by setting up his own parallel niche of study in which he can read the right literature in peace. As long as he is in college he should play the game, bite the bullet, and put up with years of mental torture in an ambiance which bears the fraudulent logo of “the place of free academic research and free speech.”

  In no way should a White college student ever attempt to wave revisionist literature in front of the noses of his classmates, or taunt his professor with a politically incorrect remark, let alone crack a racial joke in public. This will augur his immediate kiss of death and signal a violent foreclosure of his future professional life. Getting the degree must be his primary goal.

  Just about the only advantage of going to college today is its protective symbolism of the degree. Surely, the termination of the prison-like 4-year college enclosure won’t deliver fame, money, or glory. But getting a BA, MA, or PhD and going against the academic consensus will eventually elicit tacit respect from the conformists (who must always show nothing but hatred in public). To be sure, a White student won’t learn a thing from his politically correct humanities professors, whose greatest intellectual achievements consist of working out the details of their pension plan rollovers.

  White students and activists whose native tongue is English have an immense advantage over Whites in Europe. The best literature today in the humanities is available in English. Besides, US college libraries, including even small college libraries, are the best in the world. Why not take advantage of it? For a White would-be genius, or would-be writer from Russia, or Germany, or France, let alone for an intelligent young writer residing in some microscopic country in Central Europe, mastering all nuances of the English language is unavoidable if he has any intention of getting into the literary limelight. In any case most scholarly books on race, modernity, on liberal decadence, or on the Jewish question, are published in English. German self-consciousness was destroyed after WWII and along with it the German language, which, although being a very rich language, other than in Germany, is barely spoken in other parts of Europe. The gloire of France is passé and although there are good books published in French, especially in the field of the sociology of postmodernity, few White Americans or English nationalists will bother learning the French language. As a global lingua franca, American English has beco
me the only and the best weapon for cultural battles on all fronts.

  Chapter II: What to Read?

  There is no such thing as rightwing vs. leftwing literature. There is only bad literature vs. good literature, with the definition of goodness vs. badness resulting from one’s own implicit cultural and racial baggage. For more than a half century, teachers and scholars have used public and academic discourse quite in line with the egalitarian White-hating dogmas, and reading lists for their students were constructed on the basis of those dogmas. Important novelists, key social scientists, and authors suspected of writing prose that goes against the stream of dominant political ideas, have either been swept aside or removed from the reading lists. Their books, if ever mentioned, receive a critical, criminalizing, downgrading, or caricatured interpretation. Worse, if some of them trespass over the historiographic lines of self-censored behavior, as is the case with historical revisionists in Europe and the USA, they may lose a job or land in prison.

  One can tell the author’s identity by his style and narrative. At the beginning of his autodidactic voyage, a young student should avoid authors whose style and syntax are boring, or whose main theme is difficult to grasp. A White student in the humanities should start with easy-reading classics first, such as Homer and the equally easy texts of fairy tales. Great writers love clarity of expression and do not hide their towering egos behind dangling sentences and obscure lingo. This is unfortunately not always the case with some prominent racialist and traditionalist scholars, especially in the field of social science. Many good social scientists often do not know how to frame their important ideas into simple language. Hence, it’s necessary for a student to read the classics first.

  Homer is by no means children’s literature only. Nor are the fairy tales by the Brothers Grimm, Charles Perrault or Aesop. Homer, along with other classic authors from antiquity, is crucial for understanding the essence of the White man’s being: the inborn sense of the tragic and the will to power. Nowadays these notions in academia are labeled “cultural pessimism” and are squarely rejected by leftist and liberal professors who view them as symbols of violence and reject them as main pillars of fascist thought. This is not surprising. Whatever does not conceptually fit into the language of liberal college professors, modern book reviewers, literary critics, or TV opinion makers, must be labeled as “fascist.”

  Homer is important because his epic poems The Odyssey and The Iliad tell us about the inner world of our ancestors. Granted, not even the best modern translations of Homer can capture the meaning of the original text, let alone the significance of the allegories used by our ancestors several millennia ago. Those ancient symbols and metaphors, taking the shape of a myriad of Gods, demigods, centaurs, or other funny or scary creatures, have received today a distorted interpretation. However, Homer’s description of those surreal characters gives us at least a modest whiff of what our ancestors thought of themselves and how they conceived of the world that surrounded them. Their perception of the tangible world consisted of a rhapsody of images, in which every little twig in the woods and every rock on the beach had its divine, semi-divine or chaotic form, or had its own meaning of the sacred or the unsacred. Our ancestors’ mental focus was not the notion of “good vs. evil,” but rather the notion of chaos vs. order, and hence how to pull the world they lived in out of cosmic chaos and how to put together at least some semblance of a livable order. The primeval Indo–European notion of the dreaded chaos, a theme constantly resurfacing in Western literature, when transposed into the world of today, bears the name of decadence. Racial and social decadence have been viewed as the archenemies of the White man by all racialist-traditionalist-nationalist-conservative scholars.

  It is false to assume that ancient Greeks, Romans, Germanic, Celtic, or Slavic tribes who once roamed the woods of northern Europe or gazed at the Mediterranean sun, were stupid and superstitious folks with low IQ, who presumably had to wait a few more millennia in order to grow into learned, enlightened and liberal individuals. Considering the mountains of mendacity, dished out daily in public schools, colleges and in public fora, especially in the study of history and race, our ancestors, were they to be miraculously resurrected today, would view us as superstitious and credulous folks, or worse, as a treacherous pack of cowards who believe in abnormal myths that defy any sense of transcendence and that belie any logical, empirical or forensic proof of the laws of nature. However, if we were to accept the well-grounded hypothesis that White peoples have undergone serious racial decline over the last century, we may submit the conclusion that in terms of both intellect and character, and in view of the loss of the sense of the tragic, they are worse off than their distant ancestors. This is more or less the underlying theme of all the books by all so-called racialist-traditionalist-nationalist-conservative scholars whom we have covered to some extent in the columns of The Occidental Observer. At least we agree that over the last one hundred years, the proverbial White Man has willingly accelerated the process of his own social, moral and racial demise.

  The Modern Concept vs. the Ancient Image

  Our ancestors were entirely oblivious to the notion of the concept, which has become today a mandatory methodological tool in the apprehension of the world we live in. The incessant drive to quantify everything, the obsessive search for causal relationships in every detail that surrounds us, be it sex or politics, has become our predicament. Mathematics has devoured the metaphor.

  Myths and legends do not search for causal relationships. Their underlying sense of the tragic is woven into the Germanic sagas; it resurfaces all the time in ancient Greek dramas; it is a standard theme of ancient Roman thinkers. In plain English, the sense of the tragic means that even when a White man loses everything and is bound to perish, he must continue fighting to his last breath. The ancient figure of Prometheus embodies the will to power and the sense of the tragic, whose offshoots we have trailed over and over again amidst scores of European individuals who once sailed the Seven Seas or trekked in their covered wagons from the East Coast to the West Coast. We find plenty of those tragic, will-to-power, Promethean characters in the novels of Jack London and the stories of Ambrose Bierce and among many, many other racialist-traditionalist-nationalist-conservative authors. Our ancestors, with their sense of the tragic, similar to Homer’s mythical figure of Odysseus never feared death. They never expected any gifts; neither from Gods nor from men.

  Homer is crucial literature for students and White activists wishing to learn not just how to put the world’s drama into a wider historical perspective, but also how to put themselves into perspective. A follow-up and a parallel reading to Homer may be J. R. R. Tolkien. His The Hobbit is just another modality of The Odyssey.

  The will to power is falsely interpreted today as the will to subjugate other peoples. Wrong. Will to power means primarily learning the art of surpassing oneself in one’s own intellectual, military and professional endeavor. The works by social scientists, who are awkwardly and expediently dubbed as “revolutionary conservatives,” “nationalists,” “racialists,” “traditionalists,” or even “fascists,” have been written by self-introspective individuals haunted by the image that everything had its time span and that everything had to perish. But chaos needs to be prevented at all costs.

  The Frankfurt School Jewish-Austrian born American child psychoanalyst, Bruno Bettelheim in a post-WWII reeducational effort to criminalize the White man’s heritage, made a predictable Freudo-Marxian effort at providing a new interpretation of the notion of the tragic and of European fairy tales, very much in line with the efforts of his fellow psychoanalysts in different fields of social science. His later life as a professor, charges of abuse by some of his students, and his suicide in 1990, convey a picture of man who was the opposite of the baby talk man he claimed to be in his treatment of autistic kids. This tells us once again who has been in charge of academic discourse in Western education — and of the brainwashing of the Whites. Wow, one won
ders how to interpret the scenes from the Old Testament and Deuteronomy (20:16–18) — texts replete with scenes of ancient Hebrew serial killings, which could easily qualify as hate speech today. Never, ever do we encounter such an open advocacy of such gory scenes in the Iliad and or in the European fairy tales.

  The pain of reading novels may be caused by the reader’s awareness that many good novelists will never make it to the reader’s eye, nor to the public eye. Thousands of good authors, from antiquity to postmodernity still remain unknown to a large audience. Likely, in some of their books there might be passages that may offer at a least a partial key to the riddle of the universe. Even if some of those authors make it eventually to the school syllabi or hit the prime-time news, they run the risk of being interpreted according to the dominant egalitarian verities of our time. Even worse, when a historical and political cycle is over, with a new one beginning, some authors may end up condemned to oblivion, with some mediocre ones receiving all the glitz and glory. We have seen that after WWII, hundreds of scholars and novelists sympathetic to National Socialism (the Norwegian Knut Hamsun, the American Ezra Pound, the French Robert Brasillach, or the German Gottfried Benn), disappeared from the library shelves. Let us not forget that the Russian anticommunist novelist, Alexander Solzhenitsyn was not available for reading in Russia and in Eastern Europe until 1990. A young Russian student holding in hand a single copy of Solzhenitsyn’s “self-published” (samizdat) work was committing a criminal offense in the Communist System.